An examination of the passages in Ezekiel related to the 'defilement' and 'desecration' of the Temple through the spectrum of the Priestly Sources clearly shows a distinction between the two concepts and reveals Ezekiel’s precise and deliberate usage of these terms. Although they both relate to idolatrous practices, defilement of the Temple in Ezekiel follows the categories of the Priestly Sources, and thus results primarily from corpse impurity and idol worship. With regard to the Temple’s desecration, Ezekiel introduces the aspect of the intense involvement of foreigners, which he viewed as the desecrating agents of his day.

The Defilement and Desecration of the Temple in Ezekiel 371
The precise meaning of the term Î¼yxwqyÃ§ has been discussed by several
scholars, including Milgrom (11), who concluded that in P (Lev 11,10-42; 7,21)
this term has a ritual meaning â€” forbidden foods; in H (Lev 11,44; 20,25) it
has a metaphorical meaning of abhorrence and revulsion; and in Deut 7,26 and
29,16 it means idolatry (which is also, in his view, the meaning preserved in
the Second Temple period) (12). Ezekiel, on eight occasions, employs this term
in clear reference to idolatry (5,11; 7,20; 11,18.21; 20,7.8.30; 37,23), thus
indicating that in Ezekiel, as in Deuteronomy, Î¼yxwqyÃ§ serves to denote
idolatry(13). Although in the Priestly Sources â‰ˆqÃ§ does not have the capacity to
â€œdefileâ€, once it became a pejorative name for idolatry, which indeed causes
â€œdefilement,â€ this term can then be associated with defilement.
â€œAbominationsâ€ constitute a second Temple-defiling factor for Ezekiel.
The term hb[wt appears 117 times in the Bible, and 45 of these occurrences are
found in Ezekiel (14). It is not surprising that Ezekiel, who, in conveying his
message to the people, uses direct, crude means of expression in an attempt to
alarm his audience, employs this term more frequently than any other prophet,
as well as the unique constructions tw[r twb[wt (evil abominations; 6,11; 8, 9),
twlwdg twb[wt (great abominations; 8, 13.15), and tw[r twb[wt (the images of
their abominable things; 7,2). In particular, the construction Î¼twb[wt ymlx
(images of their abominable things) is used nowhere else in the Bible (15).
These distinctive phrases, which impress upon Ezekielâ€™s audience the radical
nature of the acts they committed, appear mainly in the context of the
length in chapter 8. These possibilities are grounded in the question of how impurity is
passed on to the Temple in general, and in Ezekiel in particular.
(11) J. MILGROM, â€œTwo Priestly Terms âˆeqes and tËmË‡â€™â€, Tarbiz 60 (1991) 423â€“428
(Heb.); D.N. FREEDMAN â€“ A.J. WELCH, â€œâ‰ˆqÃ§â€, TDOT XV, 465-469.
(12) MILGROM, â€œPriestly Termsâ€, 424, distinguishes between the terms â‰ˆqÃ§, â‰ˆrÃ§, and
amf. The uniqueness of â‰ˆqÃ§ is that although it is forbidden for consumption, it does not
defile by contact. It itself is pure, and, furthermore, since it originates in the ocean waters
are not susceptible to impurity, it does not transmit impurity. There is no punishment for the
consumption of a â‰ˆqÃ§, whether intentional or accidental. Milgromâ€™s definition is consistent
with the many instances of the root â‰ˆqÃ§ in the Priestly literature, but Lev 20,25 indicates
that Î¼yxqÃ§ do, in fact, transmit impurity: â€œYou shall not defile your throats (Î¼kytÃ§pn ta wxqÃ§t
alw) with a quadruped or bird or anything with which the ground teems, which I have set
apart for you to treat as impure (amfl).â€ Ezekiel also treats the â‰ˆqÃ§ as a conveyor of
defilement: â€œThey shall no more be polluted by their idols and by their loathsome
things(Î¼hyxwqyÃ§bw Î¼hylwlgb dw[ wamfy alw) and by all their transgressionsâ€ (37,23).
(13) Idolatry can be understood broadly as by J. MILGROM, â€œThe Nature and Extent of
Idolatry in Seventh-Eighth Century Judahâ€, HUCA 69 (1998) 1-13. Milgrom counts eighty-
two instances in which Ezekiel protests against idolatry among the Israelites (p. 1). The
present discussion treats only those verses that reveal the nature of these practices, as
opposed to general censure of idolatry.
(14) I will not address the etymology of this term, which is a matter of scholarly debate.
For a recent consideration, see B.J. SCHWARTZ, The Holiness Legislation (Jerusalem 1999)
219 (Heb.) and the notes there; H. -D. PREUSS, â€œ[wthbâ€, TDOT XV, 591-602 and biblio-
graphy, 591.
(15) The word Î¼lx appears twice more in Ezekiel, in both cases as part of a construction
associated with harlotry: rkz ymlx (phallic images; 16,17) and Î¼ydÃ§k ymlx (figures of
Chaldeans; 23,14). In two other instances, Ezek 8,3 and 5, we find the term lms which
appears a total of five times in Scripture (Deut 4,16; 2 Chr 33,7.15), in both cases as part of
the construction hanqh lms. There seems to be no clear-cut distinction between the two
terms; indeed, the LXX uses the same word â€” sthvlh [tou' ktwmevnou] â€” for both.